Thoughts on the Demise of Radar
Posted on December 28th, 2005 in Uncategorized | 6 Comments »
I haven’t written about Radar, the new magazine more read about than read, because its founding editor, Maer Roshan, is an acquaintance, and I didn’t think the magazine was very good. But I also believe that new magazines take some timeâand deserve some timeâto find their voice. You really can’t judge a magazine on three issues, particularly one that was operating under a short financial leash and with a constantly uncertain future.
Now Radar is, well, under the radar: financier Mort Zuckerman pulled the plug on a promised $12 million investment after just three issues. The magazine’s abrupt end has prompted some unfortunate sniping, with the magazine’s young staffers making unfortunate jokes about Zuckerman (“What’s small and pulls out in a hurry?”) and Zuckerman behaving more professionally, pointing out that the magazine was losing money hand over fist. An angry Roshan has publicly taken exception to Zuckerman’s version of events, which strikes me as a mistake, because when something like this happens, you should always be thinking about your next employer, not your last one. To his credit, though, Maer was passionate about his magazine, and I’m sure this has been tough on himâyou can’t blame the guy for being upset.
I think there were a couple of forces in play here that haven’t really been talked about.
The first is that Radar was the wrong magazine for the time we’re living in. Its obsession with celebrityânot in an US magazine-like way, but filtered celebrityâfelt very ’90s to me, very Talk. The covers were horrible: Paris Hilton, Tom Cruise, and…well, I don’t think I even saw the third issue. It all felt vaguely warmed-over and unserious, falling into a gray area between escapist rubbish and a serious magazine. And, I think, Maer made the mistake of believing that what plays well with inside-the-media mediaâPage Six, Gawkerâmattered to anyone outside of a couple of Manhattan zip codes.
Second, the mainstream media right now is controlled by Baby Boomers, and they have been extremely reluctant to hand over the reins to the younger generation. (Is it X? Y? I can’t remember.) That is, for example, the unwritten theme of Timothy O’Brien’s interesting profile of Rolling Stone founder Jann Wenner. By contrast, it’s very hard to think of a national magazine edited by someone under 45. The New Republic, I suppose, and maybe Men’s Health. (If that counts.) Instead, the younger people are making their inroads at new magazines or on the webâone reason why Radar’s website was the only part of the magazine that seemed to be having any impact.
Radar represented a media youth movement of sorts, but I’m not sure that Maer was the best ambassador of his generation. I suspect the rap against himâthat he focuses more on public relations than on editingâis probably right, and the business side of things never seemed to interest him much. Perhaps because Maer’s search for funding was so well-publicized, there was about Radar always an air of children playing with their parents’ money. Maybe ten years ago, that would have worked; people were throwing money around more carelessly then. But now, there just seemed something pathetic about it.
On the one hand, I’ll miss Radar, because I believe in magazines and want there to be more of them. On the other hand, I wish there could be more magazines that make our culture more serious, and Radar was not one of them. Maybe, had it been given time, it would have been.
6 Responses
12/28/2005 12:00 pm
If this is how you write about a “friend” i would hate to be your enemy.
12/28/2005 12:07 pm
Hmmm….well, I thought about that, and tweaked a few things to clarify my feelings. I do admire Maer for starting a magazine; it’s an incredibly hard thing to do. I wish that Radar had been a little more serious, because we don’t need another celebrity-obsessed magazine. But as I say, it isn’t fair to judge a magazine after just three issues.
The covers were terrible, though. Truly.
1/2/2024 6:07 pm
Did you ever actually get past the covers and read anything inside? The whole point of the magazine was to not be serious. It wasn’t just another celebrity obsessed magazine. It actually held a mirror up to celebrity and did so with a great deal of humor. True wit is sorely lacking from most magazines. Intelligent humor. Maer may have made some mistakes, but he and his staff brought something refreshing and new to the newstands. Sorry you didn’t read the third issue. It was the best one. Extremely funny.
So, what do you do?
1/2/2024 11:00 pm
Well, I’m a writer, and I have some experience starting magazines…which is one reason why I don’t think you can truly judge a magazine by three issues. (Although I did read the first one published back in 2004, wasn’t it?)
Having said that, I applaud your support of the magazine, and I think it probably boded well for Radar to have people with your positive attitude working there. (I know that Radar had lots of talented people on stafff.)
I do question that Radar had “true wit.” For example, I remember the piece on the “stupidest” people in television, which I thought was nasty, irresponsible, and unoriginal—as if it was something new and different to get anonymous embittered staffers to slag their bosses. (Was there a sourced quote in the entire hate parade? No.) Or even the idea that TV talking heads aren’t always the brightest bulbs in the electronic universe.
I agree with you that Radar was trying to do something a little different with celebrity, and I would have liked to see how that evolved. I just don’t think that it was working in its earliest versions.
1/3/2024 2:17 pm
Well said.
I’m just sad that it’s gone. I know how rare it is for a new magazine to take off these days. I hope that something like this is given a chance in the future.
p.s. I loved the “stupidest people on television” piece. But then again, my wit isn’t all that refined.
1/3/2024 2:22 pm
I just thought it was a cheap shot. And kind of misogynist, as well.
But we are in agreement: Radar should have had more time to find its footing. It’s never a good thing when a magazine dies.